David Irving

Hitler historian David Irving and the beautiful blonde on the rifle range

By Jason Lewis, Mail on Sunday Security Editor
Last updated at 12:43 PM on 20th December 2009

He is the 71-year-old Right-wing historian who was jailed for ‘glorifying’ Hitler’s Nazi Party. She is a 24-year-old statuesque blonde singer who works as his personal assistant.

Now intimate emails between the pair – in which David Irving declares his affection for the young American – have been leaked on the internet.

The messages, written during a book tour of America last month, also reveal an embarrassing tiff between the historian and Jaenelle Antas, who has been travelling with him.

Neo-Nazi pin-up: American Jaenelle Antas is a 'comely maiden' according to David Irving

Ms Antas, whom Irving refers to as ‘J’, is from Minnesota and has been working for him while also trying to launch herself as an opera singer.

The emails show divorcee Irving is clearly taken with his young helper, who has become a neo-Nazi pin-up after posting pictures of herself on Stormfront, an internet discussion site for ‘pro-White activists and anyone else interested in White survival’.

The photographs, which feature the blonde on a shooting range with an automatic weapon and posing with handguns with her friends, also show her taking a trip with Irving to feed the swans on the River Thames near his Windsor home.

Target: Jaenelle Antas at a shooting range

While the precise nature of the relationship between Irving and Ms Antas is a mystery, Irving is keen to shower her with affection, telling her: ‘You are pure Gold.’

And in an email to a friend, Irving reveals he has been asked about the ‘blonde bombshell’ by a journalist and writes: ‘I emphasise . . . that there is nothing going on between us.’

Irving’s email account and website were hacked by ‘anti-racist activists’ who then posted his credit-card accounts, mobile phone number, private correspondence and email address book on the web.

Embarrassing: Personal emails between David Irving and his assistant Jaenelle Antas have been leaked

The most intriguing emails feature Irving’s relationship with Ms Antas, who at one point threatens to leave the tour.

On November 7, she complains about the way he has been treating her and about being forced to miss a date with one of her friends. Irving replies: ‘Get over it.’

In another email to Ms Antas, he adds: ‘If you want to quit, I can’t stop you. It will not be the first time I have been let down at the last moment.’

Last night Irving said that the hacking came at the end of a campaign of violence and intimidation against him and Ms Antas on the US tour.

At one point she was attacked with pepper spray. Masked men armed with baseball bats tried to force their way into another meeting.

Irving said: ‘The FBI has asked for my assistance in tracking down the hackers. They have done tens of thousands of pounds of damage. Effectively they drove a truck bomb into my online bookstore.’

Asked about the publication of the personal emails between him and Ms Antas, he said: ‘When I told her she went bright red.’

And asked about their relationship, he said: ‘She is 24. She is a comely maiden. She is my personal assistant, nothing more.’

In 1996 Irving brought an unsuccessful libel case against the American historian Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books. The court found that he was an active Holocaust denier, anti-Semite and racist.

Irving was arrested during a visit to Austria three years ago and convicted of ‘glorifying and identifying with the German Nazi Party’ and served ten months in jail.

Iran demands freedom of suspected arms dealer in return for lost British sailors

By Jason Lewis and William Lowther
Last updated at 2:06 AM on 13th December 2009

• 
  

Accused: Diplomat Nosratollah Tajik

The Government is considering the release of a senior former Iranian diplomat held in the UK accused of supplying weapons for terrorists.

Tehran is demanding the tit-for-tat release in response to its decision to free a group of British yachtsmen who strayed into Iranian waters last month.

But the extraordinary move has been greeted with anger in America, where the diplomat, Nosratollah Tajik, Iran’s former ambassador to Jordan, stands accused of conspiring to sell military equipment to Islamic extremists.

Tajik, 55, was arrested in 2006 and is currently on bail pending an appeal against extradition to the US.

The final decision on the extradition rests with the Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, and any move to block his transfer to the US would ignite a furious row with the Americans.

There is still anger in the US over the release to Libya three months ago of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Al Megrahi from a Scottish jail.

And special treatment for Tajik would cause a renewed outcry among human rights campaigners in the UK, who unsuccessfully lobbied Mr Johnson to veto British computer hacker Gary McKinnon’s proposed transfer to the US for trial.

Tajik - living in Britain after being appointed an honorary fellow of Durham University in 2004 - is accused of being the UK link in an international illegal arms network.

According to a witness at a US House of Representatives inquiry into state-sponsored terrorism in Iran, he has also been identified as one of several diplomats recruiting Palestinians to establish terrorist cells.

Political footballs: The five released sailors who Iran hopes use to bargain with

The Iranians raised Tajik’s case with British diplomats during emergency meetings to try to secure the release of the yachtsmen earlier this month.

They also discussed the issue directly with Foreign Secretary David Miliband earlier this year.

Last night, British diplomatic sources confirmed the Iranians ‘brought the subject up’ every time there are official talks between the two countries.

In 2006, an undercover operation by US agents led to Tajik being accused of trying to supply nightvision weapons sights to Iran - banned under an arms embargo.

An extradition hearing was told how two agents secretly filmed Tajik in a London office allegedly discussing a deal that would have sent the military hardware from the US to Iran via the UK and Turkey.

The court heard the deal was worth $3million (£1.8million).

David Perry QC, for the US government, told an earlier hearing that the Americans tipped off Scotland Yard, leading to Tajik’s arrest.

The Iranian’s lawyers claim the Americans acted illegally by entrapping a man on British soil.

His barrister, Alun Jones QC, said: ‘The sting is standard practice in the US. In English law, the US investigators are guilty of the criminal offence of incitement.

‘The American extradition statementdoes not disclose whether UK authorities knew about this (in which case they too would be guilty) or whether US agents are running amok in London on frolics of their own.’

Details of the case - first revealed by The Mail on Sunday - led to human rights campaigners demanding the Government reveal what it knew about US spies launching this kind of operation in Britain.

Last night the Home Office said: ‘The Home Secretary is currently considering representations from Nosratollah Tajik. The Iranians have consistently lobbied for his release.

‘We have made it clear to the Iranian authorities on several occasions that this was a legal, not a political, process, in which the UK Government has played no role.’

Last night, highly placed sources in Washington confirmed that they were taking a close interest in the developments and made clear they felt strongly that Tajik should not be freed.

The source said: ‘The US is fully aware of what is going on and has asked the British not to make any concessions on this issue.’

The moves come after Iran freed five British yachtsmen held by the country’s feared Revolutionary Guard for a week.

Luke Porter, 21, from Somerset, Oliver Smith, 31, from Southampton, Oliver Young, 21, from Cornwall, Sam Usher, 26, from North Yorkshire, and Bahrain-based David Bloomer, who is believed to be in his 60s, were held on November 25.

Iran’s official news agency said they had been released after authorities established their yacht had entered Iranian waters accidentally while sailing from Bahrain to Dubai for a race.

David Miliband bans envoys from helping the BNP

By Jason Lewis, Mail on Sunday Security Editor
Last updated at 3:17 AM on 13th December 2009

Miliband ordered a ban on helping MEPs who have far right views

David Miliband has secretly banned British embassy staff from giving help to BNP leader Nick Griffin.

The Foreign Secretary has also ordered diplomats not to assist the
far-Right party’s other MEP, former National Front leader Andrew Brons.

A letter, entitled ‘Handling Extremist MEPs’ and marked ‘Restricted’, was circulated to the heads of Britain’s European embassies after the pair were elected to the European Parliament in June.

Written by Matthew Rycroft, the UK’s top European Union diplomat, it says far-Right MEPs, like other British members of the European Parliament, can be sent ‘factual written briefings’ on policy issues but nothing else.

British MEPs from mainstream parties can normally expect private briefings from officials and to be offered the chance to meet diplomats and Ministers.

Mr Rycroft wrote: ‘FCO Ministers have decided that there should be
no other contact with MEPs of any nationality who represent racist or extremist views.’

The letter adds that other Government offices have also been advised to restrict help.
As a direct consequence of the policy – revealed after a Freedom of Information Act request – the BNP MEPs have not been invited to two Foreign Office receptions.

Last night, the Foreign Office said the letter was to remind diplomats of the ‘longstanding’ policy on those who represent racist views.

The disclosure follows the row over Mr Miliband’s attack on the Conservatives’ alliance with the Latvian Fatherland And Freedom Party and one of its MEPs who, the Foreign Secretary said, had an ‘anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi past’.

But it also comes after Labour’s decision to abandon its policy of not sharing the same platform with the BNP – paving the way for Nick Griffin’s controversial appearance on Question Time with Justice Secretary Jack Straw.

Can we see your documents please, Your Majesty... Queen faces anti-terror checks every time she leaves UK

By Jason Lewis, Mail on Sunday Security Editor
Last updated at 10:08 PM on 05th December 2009

No exemptions: The Queen and Prince Philip at Heathrow

The Queen is to be forced to go through an identity check every time she flies into and out of Britain.

For the first time, Her Majesty will be compelled to give her full name, age, address, nationality, gender and place of birth to immigration officials, who will then check that she is not on a list of wanted terrorists.

Foreign heads of state, including US President Barack Obama, and other members of the Royal Family will also have to submit to the security checks under new border controls, called e-Borders.

It is unclear how the Queen will be asked for her personal information as she is not required to carry a passport and would normally be met off the aircraft by her chauffeur-driven car. The new system asks for a passport number, expiry date and details of where the passport was issued.

Buckingham Palace has been warned that the Queen will not be exempt from providing 'Travel Document Information' (TDI), which will then be uploaded on to the £750million computer system at the National Border Targeting Centre near Manchester Airport.

The system will provide a comprehensive record of everyone crossing the UK border by plane, sea or via the Channel Tunnel to 'strengthen the security of those who live in and visit our country'.

All passengers are checked against terrorist and criminal watch lists, and the computer analyses travel patterns to highlight suspicious movements.

Controversially, the information is also due to be shared with America, European security agencies and other 'friendly' nations.

A confidential document from Trusted Borders, the private consortium developing the e-Borders project for the Home Office, makes it clear that the Queen and other VIPs will be subject to the same new restrictions as other travellers.

The document, written by lead contractor Raytheon Systems and obtained by The Mail on Sunday, contains a list of questions relating to the new system that may be raised by those implementing it, such as airlines.

One reads: 'We carry a variety of VIPs; Heads of State, Royal Family members among others, for whom security is paramount and for whom we are not provided with all TDI. How do we report these individuals?'

The UK Border Agency response is unequivocal: 'Answer: The UK authorities require that TDI must be provided for all passengers without exception.'

The move will end the current practice of allowing VIPs, including senior members of the Royal Family, to travel under a pseudonym on commercial flights.

At the moment staff at Britain's airports are alerted to expect a senior Royal or other dignitaries by a message that 'Mr Confidential' is expected for a flight.

Ground staff would usually enter a false name on the flight manifest to protect their identity, but under the new system this practice will be banned and real names entered.

Last night a senior airport security source warned: 'The reason for entering a false name in the system is to protect the individual's security. Putting a VIP's real name in the system will alert people that someone important is on a particular flight and may, if the information falls into the wrong hands, make the flight a terrorist target. It is plainly ridiculous.'

Tory MP Patrick Mercer, former adviser to Security Minister Admiral West, agreed the new rules would increase the security risk to the Royal Family and said the system needed to be flexible to be effective.

Last night Royal sources said that members of the Royal Family would comply with whatever security procedures the Government decided upon.

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: 'As a British passport is issued in the name of Her Majesty, it is unnecessary for the Queen to possess one. All other members of the Royal Family, including the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales, have passports.'

The Home Office refused to discuss the contents of the Trusted Borders document.

Brodie Clark, head of the Border Force, said: 'For security reasons we will not be commenting on how e-Borders will affect Royal travel protocols. It should be clear, however, that the Head of State for the UK does not require a passport.'

Senior Judges to ‘simplify’ Court of Protection

By Jason Lewis
Last updated at 10:07 PM on 05th December 2009

Justice Secretary Jack Straw leaving Downing Street last month

Two senior judges have been appointed to ‘simplify’ the running of the Court of Protection, which controls the finances of some of society’s most vulnerable people.

The court, which bars the media and the public from its deliberations and rarely publishes its judgments, has faced nearly 4,000 complaints since it was set up two years ago.

Mr Justice Charles and Mrs Justice Proudman will chair a committee to examine whether the court provides an ‘effective service’.

Their appointments follow the intervention of Justice Secretary Jack Straw after The Mail on Sunday highlighted huge flaws with the court’s system.

The court is also accused of mismanaging the £2.7billion it controls on behalf of vulnerable people – including those suffering from dementia and other forms of mental incapacity.

The court’s president Sir Mark Potter said: ‘The Court of Protection has faced a number of difficulties in its first two years and court users have complained that court procedure is too formal particularly in relation to straightforward financial matters which are not contentious.

‘My aim is to create a set of rules, practice directions and forms that are clear and simple for lay and professional users to understand.

'Where possible, the committee should simplify the handling of routine property and affairs cases, for example by slimming down some of the procedures.’

Did Iran's president take part in a demo during a brutal afternoon in London (or was it a man who looked exactly like him?)

By Jason Lewis
Last updated at 11:45 AM on 03rd December 2009

The features are unmistakable, the fervour irrepressible as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad turns against a crowd of opponents.

But despite the uncanny likeness, officially this is not the President of Iran who oversaw the bloody suppression of his country’s democracy movement.

This picture was taken in London in 1984 and raises puzzling queries over Mr Ahmadinejad, 53.

Much of his rise to Iran’s presidency is shrouded in the secrecy which surrounds what has gone on in the pariah state since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 swept the late Ayatollah Khomeini to power.

Protest: But a spokesman for the Iranian Embassy said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wasn't in London in the 1980s

Now this photograph, unearthed by The Mail on Sunday, suggests a young Mr Ahmadinejad spent time in London and took part in a notorious incident which demonstrated his and the Iranian regime’s repressive and sometimes violent nature.

The picture, first published by the Daily Mail on April 27, 1984, shows a smart-suited man on the balcony of the Iranian consulate in Kensington, his fist raised in a menacing salute as he harangues anti-Khomeini demonstrators in the street below.

The man, who reports described as a diplomat, had stepped on to the balcony hours after protesters opposed to the Islamic regime stormed the building as part of synchronised worldwide action.

As demonstrators burst in chanting anti-Khomeini slogans, consulate staff, including members of the notorious Republican Guard, locked them in the reception room.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad now

According to reports at the time, and witnesses who spoke to The Mail on Sunday last week, the Iranian staff then returned in numbers, armed with wooden and iron clubs. Inside, the 11 unarmed protesters were taken prisoner.

Some reports suggested they were tortured to discover the names of relatives and friends still living in Iran.

The late investigative reporter Paul Foot said: ‘The protesters were bound, interrogated and beaten. Two were beaten unconscious. One recovered but could not lift his head because it was stuck to the carpet in congealed blood.’ He said the beating went on for seven hours. Then at 6pm, a diplomat, and it is unclear if this was Mr Ahmadinejad, appeared on the balcony and announced that the protesters had been ‘dealt with’.

The demonstrators were then thrown out of the building with placards hung around their necks accusing them of being terrorists in the pay of the US and France. No one from the consulate faced charges.

Last week the Foreign Office said it had no record of Mr Ahmadinejad being at the Iranian consulate in the Eighties. The Diplomatic List for 1984 contains no reference to the name Ahmadinejad, which he adopted after his family moved to Tehran when he was a boy, or to his real name Mahmoud Saborjhian. Yesterday the Iranian Embassy added that it ‘didn’t think it was right’ that he had ever been based in London.

Two people who took part in the protest, who spoke to The Mail on Sunday last week, also said they had no recollection of him that day.

Mr Ahmadinejad was also alleged to have taken part in the beating of American diplomats at its embassy in Tehran after it was taken over by students in 1979.

A photograph purportedly showed Mr Ahmadinejad escorting a blindfolded US hostage.

But the Iranians produced a picture of the President as a young man which appeared to look little like the hostage-taker.

We passed the picture to photo-analysis firm OmniPerception, who regularly aid police. It said: ‘A database of several thousand people was complemented with four recent images of the President. A comparison using the 1984 image was made. The result indicated the four pictures to be the most likely match of all subjects in the database. If this was a police inquiry, this would give cause for further investigation.’

A spokesman for Iran's Embassy in London said: 'We strongly denounce any claim that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the man in your picture of protests at the Iranian Embassy in 1984. In fact he did not visit the UK in 1980s.'

Mother dies after cancer screening machine blunder

By Jason Lewis
Last updated at 1:42 AM on 29th November 2009

One woman has died and hundreds of other cancer patients put at risk after a crucial machine used to test for the best way to treat the killer disease developed a fault that was not repaired for at least a month.

The NHS hospital at the centre of the blunder failed to tell patients their results may have been wrong due to the broken equipment.

It also did not report the incident to the medical authorities – an apparent breach of Department of Health rules designed to protect patients and alert doctors to problems.

Last month, mum Tracey Kindley, 43, died of breast cancer after learning her treatment had been based on inaccurate test results.

Tracey Kindley with her son Max. She died last month after learning her cancer treatment had been based on inaccurate test results

She was being treated at a private hospital in North London after she discovered a suspicious lump in March 2005.

Her doctors performed a biopsy and sent it to a local NHS Trust’s pathology department, which confirmed her cancer. But one of the machines used at the Queen Elizabeth II Hospital, in Welwyn Garden City, crucial in assisting her doctors in deciding the best treatment for the cancer, was not working correctly.

The machine – used to test hormone levels – gave a ‘false negative reading’ for oestrogen, meaning she was not prescribed certain life-saving drugs because it was thought they would have no effect on her cancer.

Her doctors spotted the error only when she failed to respond to treatment and the cancer spread.

One of the machines used at the Queen Elizabeth II hospital was not working correctly

The doctors ordered new laboratory tests on the original biopsy and these results showed very high oestrogen levels in the cancer cells, alerting them to a major error.

Health service managers at the Queen Elizabeth II ordered checks and discovered the machine had developed a fault around the time of the tests on Mrs Kindley.

A service report on the equipment shows a ‘critical repair’ was carried out on May 6, 2005. The managers claim the machine was ‘fixed within days’ of the problem being identified, but crucially Mrs Kindley’s tests were carried out on April 8 – almost a month before the fault was spotted.

The East and North Herts NHS Trust, which oversees the hospital, re-examined the results of other patients whose samples were tested on days either side of Mrs Kindley’s.

However, an internal investigation concluded the incident was a ‘one-off’ and that despite testing hundreds of patients during the period, no other patients could have been affected.

The conclusion meant patients tested when the machine is known to have been malfunctioning – a period of around four weeks – were never alerted that they, too, may have been given the wrong results.

In the weeks before her death, Mrs Kindley began a legal action against the hospital. Her lawyer Hugh Johnson, of Stewarts Law, believes that had she been given the right treatment, she would have had a 70 per cent chance of making a full recovery.

In his letter to the Trust, Dr Nihal Shah, Mrs Kindley’s consultant clinical oncologist, wrote that she ‘had concerns that a similar scenario does not arise for other patients’.

Mrs Kindley died on October 28. Yesterday, her husband said he blamed the test errors for his wife’s death. ‘I believe they robbed me of my wife. The right results would have opened up other forms of treatment and I believe she would be with me and her son Max now.’

Last night, the Trust acknowledged the tests carried out had given a ‘partial false negative result’ and it has apologised that this should have happened. It admitted that the problem had not been reported to the Medicines and Healthcare product Regulatory Agency. ‘That decision is now being reviewed.’